We need leadership on guns

Despite public support of background checks, Washington rejects them

In middle school, students learn the debate: Are our representatives in Washington, D.C., tasked with doing what their constituents want or what they believe is best for the country?

Perhaps we should add another possibility. Are the people we elect to represent us in Washington really there to do what the National Rifle Association wants? That is what appears to have happened when the U.S. Senate voted on a bill to expand gun background checks.

Despite their constituents' overwhelming support of this baby step toward finding answers to the level of gun violence in this country, 46 senators voted against the compromise plan, which would have required background checks for most gun sales. An earlier tactical move put the number of votes required to pass at a supermajority of 60.

While more than half the citizens of this country favor passing new gun control, the NRA is steadfastly against it - and senators who didn't vote that way face being cut off from NRA funding and getting a failing grade on the gun lobby's legislative report card.

It appears that those senators are more afraid of gun lobbyists than of vote-toting constituents.

Our own Sen. Roy Blunt proved his adherence to the NRA dogma when he gave his excuse for his "no" vote. "It potentially could lead to a gun registry." (Note that Blunt's son, Matt Blunt, sits on the board of the NRA, and the senator ranks 10th among NRA campaign contribution recipients.)

Blunt's excuse is simply a straw man created by the NRA to put fear into the hearts of gun owners. It is not real but certainly works to stir up the anxiety the NRA feeds its followers on a regular basis.

So, why would 54 Senators buy into that fear? Because the NRA has given more than $26 million in campaign contributions, with 82 percent of that going to Republicans. The Republican National Committee is at the top of its list.

To be fair, the NRA supports some Democratic candidates as well, which may explain their "no" votes as well.

We join our voices with the families of the Sandy Hook tragedy in calling for brave action. We congratulate those senators, including Missouri's Claire McCaskill, for their "yes" votes in the face of NRA threats.

We need courageous leadership on the issues of gun violence. We should not need another Sandy Hook - or the hundreds of handgun deaths that plague our cities - to stir up the will to take a stand against that violence or the NRA.

We need a few brave men and women in Washington, D.C., to do what is best for the country.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Email this article

We need leadership on guns

In middle school, students learn the debate: Are our representatives in Washington, D.C., tasked with doing what their constituents want or what they believe is best for the country?